JorgeDavid

Hello everyone! I wanted to share an orchestral arrangement from one the Bagatelles for piano that I composed a few weeks ago. With the hope of trying to keep on learning orchestration I bought a couple of days ago the new sounds for MuseScore 4 by Berlin Orchestral Tools and the Adler's Orchestration book (which, of course, I did not have time to start reading yet 😅). I found the sounds extremely satisfying (specially considering that they work in my laptop which is a little slow for most things) which led me to test them by orchestrating one of my Bagatelles. Of course, the score presented here is a performance score, the original file for the audio is much, much more complex to try to make the most out of the Berlin sounds. For this arrangement I have added several sections that are not in the original piece: Lyrical introduction (m.1~8) A motivic transition to the main theme from the F minor B section (m.43~49). Restatement of the closing two bars for stronger ending. The rest is the same as the original piece but I got rid of the repeats (as the piece would have been too long and the orchestration repetitive). The piece is still in the form ABA' with the A part in F major and the B part in F minor. I have been listening a lot to Ghibli Films orchestral music by Joe Hisaishi lately so some influenced might be found here (not on purpose, but rather just by pure listening). The only thing I did on purpose was the use of the piano as the main instrument (which Hisaishi does a lot). Feel free to criticize anything you think is bad. I tried my best and tried to study the details of the instruments as I was needing them, but I am well aware that orchestrating is a hard task and I consider this orchestration a "draft" as there are probably many mistakes. I tried to choose similar dynamics to the ones I used for the audio rendition but I believe maybe most dynamics should be increased by one level for a real performance to sound as in the audio, but I am not totally sure. Any feedback, suggestion or comment is more than welcome! Thank you for listening and hope you like it! --- Original Piano Version ---

Hi @chopin, I have been interested in music jotter as I find that being able to compose in the cloud is a really attractive feature. I tested it for a little bit yesterday but I was running into some issues when trying to add three tracks. Two tracks worked okay but when having a third track added the layout would break in some parts (let me know if you do not know of this issue and I would try to replicate it and take a screenshot of it). The reason I was using three tracks is because for starting to learn how to use music jotter, I though it would be better first starting with one voice per track instead of having two voices in the same track from the beginning. I did not have much time so I could not test it much but I will try during this week to see if I learn how to use it! Thank you!

Thanks for the suggestion, @PCC! I will consider changing the answer to tonal! and thank you for listening and commenting!

Thanks for the suggestions @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu. The episode was indeed strangely composed (it was more like a sketch, in some ways). I used the same melodic ideas but changed the whole episode so now the counterpoint is much better and fuller. Thank you! I agree but also disagree. I agree that experimenting with well established forms or techniques while claiming that your experimentation is automatically, just by experimentation, as artistic and tasteful as the canon is a mistake. However, I believe everyone can experiment with anything as long as their experimentation is non-serious and not claiming to be establishing a new artistic accomplishment. I agree that for being artistically experimental (in other words, for doing experimental art) one needs to learn the techniques properly, and to properly distance themselves from the mainstream of those techniques in artistic and tasteful ways. But I do think that anyone can (and at times they probably should) play around with well-established techniques (regardless of how many years old they are) even before they excel at those techniques, just for the sake of playing and investigation. Of course, only doing that while never studying the techniques properly is where the problem lies. The problem is caused when someone never learns the techniques of the past properly and are always composing in superficial ways based on those techniques while claiming that what they do is incredibly artistic and valuable. Thanks for your comment since it gave me motivation! I wanted to learn fugue properly from long time ago but, since I know fugues are really complex both to compose and to play, I was delaying that as I did not feel my piano skills were good enough to studying and playing fugues at the piano. Thanks to your comment I was inspired to start that long journey. So I started learning my first prelude and fugue from the Well-tempered clavier and studying counterpoint in a systematic way, so in many months (or years) from now maybe I can write a nice piano fugue that I can even play myself! Thanks, @Luis Hernández!

Thank you for listening and for your advices @Luis Hernández and @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu! I know the subject is really inconvenient for a proper fugue. Specially because of the jump from B to F, the strange flow caused in m.3 because of that jump, and the anacrusis beginning in the G (dominant) moving to a C right after that. Since both made it hard to write a proper real and tonal answer: if the beginning was in G I could have written a proper real answer with the Dominant harmony in the first measure. And the fact that G moved to C at the beginning rendered a tonal answer boring, since the G would have to be changed to a C in the first bar so the melody would have been something like C-C-Bb. Also I realized the tritone jump was weird. However I kind of found the effect funny and a mixture of seriousness and ridicule, somehow (I particularly like that jump in a legato melodic instrument). So I just kept the subject and decided to experiment with this piece to do many things that should not be done, such as having that tritone leap, a real answers starting in non-tonic harmonies and "non-serious" counterpoint. So this is more an "experimental fughetta" rather than an attempt to write a proper one. I uploaded it because it was honestly fun to do, even if I know the final result is not particularly appealing 🤣. Thanks for listening!!

Hello everyone! Yesterday I was considering participating in the 1 minute Fugue challenge that has been opened recently so I started composing a 1 minute fugue. However, since I only had a few hours I did not give it too much though and started composing by ear (without theoretical thinking) with the first subject. I decided I wanted to have a real answer in the exposition and that was a mistake. Because of the real answer, It is quite dissonant at times with some suspensions as soon as the real answer starts, so it probably does not work as a proper fugue exposition. Because of that, I was going to call it "Strange Fughetta", but I just though the title might be funnier (for me) in Spanish. So I named it "Allochthonous Little Fugue" (I just found out the word Allochthonous exist in english too). The Fughetta form is the following: [m.1 ~ m.15]: Alto voice in Cmin --> Soprano voice in Gmin (real answer) -> Episode --> Bass in Cmin. [m.16 ~ m.19]: Canonic episode based in few motives of the subject. [m.20 ~ m.23] Subject in Cmin (tonic) by the Soprano with dominant pedal in Bass. [m.24 ~ m.29]: Ending Thank you!

Thank you so much for listening and I am really glad you liked it, @mazeth! Yes, you are right. I did not realize at first but with continuous listening I became aware that bars 28-29 change a little bit the style. It is like if from a classical style the piece momentarily gets into a more anime/videogame filmy style for two bars (or that is how it sounds to my ears now). I am considering ways for fixing those bars for make it blend better. Thank you so much for the comment!

You are right those are somes of the "rules" of four-part writing. But normally those rules are just the result of a specific voice movement that consist on moving internal voices as little as possible while avoiding paralell 8th and 5ths. In four-part writing you would not normally have the same C note in the bass for 3 measures or jump around with the internal voices so much. In my opinion, you can jump directly to learning four-part writing without counterpoint. That said, it is probably better to do both at the same time: four-part writing and counterpoint. The "practical manual for harmony" by Korsakov teaches, step by step, exactly what you are trying to do. I think it is really useful for learning four-part writing. But I am sure there are other good books for learning four-part writing. For counterpoint, I used the Kent Kennan book that @PeterthePapercomPoser recommended and it was really useful. I think, even just learning two voice counterpoint, will help you a lot understand harmony much better!

Thanks for the nice words, @GospelPiano12! I am really glad you enjoyed it! I am planning to orchestrate it some day in the future so I have been thinking about possible instrumentation too but I never though about the sax! I think the tenor sax would sound really nice during the main melody of the beginning! Thanks for listening and commenting!

Thanks for listening and I am glad you liked it, @MJFOBOE! I am planning to use my piano pieces as models for learning how to orchestrate in the future, so probably I will try some day to orchestrate this. Thanks for the comment!

Thank you so much for your nice words, @Jqh73o! I am really glad you liked the main theme! I also considered composing a theme and variation piece from it. However, I had to give the idea up since my compositional skills were not enough and I was having troubles coming up with nice variations (also, many times variations get more virtuosic as the piece evolves, and I am trying to write only things that I can play). That is why I turned it into a ternary piece. I would be okay with that, since it would be helpful for me to learn how different composers that know more than me would deal with the theme. I am not sure that this theme is as good as to deserve such a treatment, though. But I appreciate you suggesting it and considering the theme to be so good for variations! Thank you! I always had troubles composing in Romantic style so I am slowly trying to analyze romantic pieces and I am glad it is slowly working! I still have troubles, particularly for using diminished harmonies without breaking the flow of the music. I tried adding more expressive augmented and diminished harmonies but I failed making them sound good, so I had to use simpler harmonies more often that I would have liked. Thank you so much for listening to the piece and commenting!!

Hello everyone, I want to share the second Bagatelle I composed. It is a slow tempo Bagatelle in E minor for the piano. Most of my pieces are in a moderate tempo and in major so I wanted to test myself once by composing a slow piece that stays for the whole time in minor. As my previous Bagatelle, I composed it and played it myself in a Yamaha P-515 digital piano with the Yamaha CFX piano sound. I might have composed some parts differently but, when things got too hard for me to play, I had to simplify them to my level. I did record it with the phone so it has a lot noise and the quality is not good. Also, I made a couple of mistakes here and there but this was the best I could play it. I plan to practice it and record it with better quality but it might take some time. The piece is in ternary form with the main theme (A) in Emin and a second theme (B) in Bmin. The B theme is restated in the home key (Eminor) before going back to the repetition of the A theme. Since the tempo is slow and the themes themselves quite long there are no repeats in any section. Any comment and feedback is more than welcome! Thank you for listening and hope you enjoy it!

Hello @nippon276, and congratulations on completing your first piece! The piece is nice and I enjoyed listening to it! I also took half of that course in the past (I never finished it, though, so I never composed the final assignment). I remember it was a nice course for starting to compose things and getting the hang of how composing worked. Since you finished that course, I would recommend you to learn the following: 1) Counterpoint: Particularly in two voices, there are many books that teach two and three voice counterpoint in the style of Bach. For example the book "Counterpoint" by Kent Kennan. 2) 4-voice part writing: I do not know many resources for this. I learned from "Harmony Treatise" by Korsakov, which I highly recommend. Back in the day it was one of the resources that helped me the most to start composing with a little bit more confidence. These two skills are really practical and t you would be able to apply them to your compositions really soon, specially now that you have the basics grasped from the "Write like Mozart" course. Regarding the piece, others will be able to give more and better feedback but I will point out a few things I saw and I think might help you: 1. Second Inversion Chords Measure 2 is a second inversion IV chord. Second inversion chords require, normally, special treatment (many times the bass move by step). The second inversion IV chord is somehow similar to the third inversion ii chord in that the bass note (F) normally moves by step to the E. In this case, it might sound better if you have a D in the bass (first inversion IV) instead of the second inversion IV. You can look for the common treatment given to second inversion chords since there will be information online. 2. Melody and Accompaniment When you have a clear melody and an accompaniment (like in this case) you do not need to worry too much about the melody creating good voice leading with all the notes of the accompaniment. Focus on creating good counterpoint between the melody and the bass mostly. Then fill in the rest of the accompaniment voices without taking to much into account the melody. In other words, you can focus only on the accompaniment having good voice leading internally and those voices could double the melodic notes. Of course you can also avoid doubling the melody notes in the accompaniment and there is nothing wrong with that. I just comment this because for a long time I was obsessed with writing perfect voice leading of accompaniment and melody together, when, in real compositions, many times the melody tones are doubled in the accompaniment and the accompaniment has good internal voice leading without too much consideration to the melodic contour (except in the melody-bass case). 3. Melody and chord-tones I believe in the course they teach about passing notes, arpeggiaturas, etc. Always be aware of those when creating a melody (even if, in the end, you decide to write the melody without following those "rules"). For example, in the m.2 you have a IV chord but the last four notes of the melody in the measure are: A-G-E-D. G and E do not form part of the main notes of the chord (Bb-D-F-A). It is not necessarily wrong so, if you like it, it is perfectly okay as it is, but in this case maybe it would sound better by doing A-G-F-D. That way you use the G as a passing tone and, in addition, you do not sound the leading tone E before the m.3. Many melodic movements are possible but always be aware of the underlying chord to be sure about your choices. 4. Melodic-Bass Countepoint As commented before, be specially careful about the counterpoint created between the melody and the bass. For example: a) m.4~5: You have a main melodic contour of F-F-G-E, with a main bass contour of F-F-F-E. It might sound better if the melody and bass did not coincide at the beginning so many times. Also, since you want to do the F-E movement in the bass, it might be better not having the leading tone E in the melody. b) m.15: In second and third beats you have the same noes in the bass and in the melody (A-Bb). This is not too bad since you are sounding the C after the A, and also the F in first beat on the bass. Good Job!

Thank you so much Luis, I am really glad you liked it! I agree that the score lacks soul. I am planning to add dynamics and markings but now since I did not compose it through the software (where I was forced to place dynamics for the midi playback to sound realistic) I am actually not even sure which markings to put that will make players perform it as would like to 😅 I will have to give it some though and add them to make the score looks better. Thanks for commenting and I hope everything is going well with you!!

Hello everyone, I want to share a Bagatelle I just composed. I composed it all at the piano (my first piece composed in the piano, instead of through Sibelius) and wrote it down afterwards. I posted it on the "Incomplete Works" section as I was having second thoughts about the B section but I ended up not making so many changes and only some improvements here and there. It is a Bagatelle in F major for piano (thanks to @PeterthePapercomPoser for giving me the clue to find out the style of the piece). I played it in a Yamaha P-515 digital piano with the Bösendorfer piano sound. Since my playing is not so good I had to record the whole thing in three different parts and then mix them in Audacity. I tried to fix any sound issue that appeared but there are two particular spots that sound strange as I was not able to mix them better, so sorry about that. Also, I make a couple of mistakes here and there. The good thing is that, since I composed it by playing it myself, it is not a particularly hard piece to play. The piece is in ABA' form with the main theme (A) in Fmaj and a contrasting section (B) in Fmin. Any comment and feedback is more than welcome! Thank you for listening and hope you enjoy it!